You guys never won the Big 12 but are somehow going to win a much better conference? Right.

I have no idea how this post responds to anything that I've typed, but I didn't know that there was a ceiling imposed on Missouri's program when they made the switch to the best conference in the country.

I have no idea how this post responds to anything that I've typed, but I didn't know that there was a ceiling imposed on Missouri's program when they made the switch to the best conference in the country.

Well, I would argue TCU and WVU made a decidedly "step up" in conferences, whereas everyone who left the B12 made a step sideways except Nebraska, and only because of the academic bonuses.

Mizzou and aTm made a big step up in conferences. Nebraska moved laterally, but their timing has worked out well with tOSU being on probation, as they may sneak into the Rose Bowl.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

That doesn't mean this conference isn't better than that conference in any given year, but the B12, SEC, B1G and PAC are going to be at the Big Boy table every year. If you go undefeated in one of those conferences, chances are you are going to the MNC, and that won't change much with the new playoffs.

True

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

The ACC and BEAST are in that area where the rest of the conference is so bad, it hurts them in the human evaluations that one loss is probably enough to put them out of consideration, and even if they go undefeated, they still might get squeezed.

You're underestimating the ACC in football, at least this year. Clemson and Florida State are both top 10. Va Tech is down this year, but they are also a solid program. I don't know if Miami ever wakes up, but they certainly have the ability to be a monster if they put the resources into their football program.

The BEAST is a mid-major waiting to happen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

So, if I were to rank whether conference realignment was more better/more worse fo the school it would be:

1. TCU. They lose the guaranteed wins, but they are smack in the middle of their conference geographical footprint and in one of the biggest cities to boot. In the long run, a good move.

Absolutely

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

2. Utah. Much like TCU without as much of the metro/geo points, though.

I don't know about this one. I don't think they are a fit culturally, academically, or athletically. Obviously, it's great to get the payday, so that's a win. They fit in a lot better before the move, though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

3. WVU. Obviously, they need to improve for the week in/week out competition, but the move up guarantees them a chance at the big party. Geographic isolation a downside, but the culture fits.

Agreed. Any team leaving the BEAST for another BCS conference gets an automatic win. It's tough from a geography standpoint, but I don't think people from WV understand geography, anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

4. Nebraska. A step sideways competition and opportunity, but a big opportunity in academic money.

Yep. The B1G is in flux right now, and all of the football programs are jockeying for position. It looks like tOSU is still going to be on top, but Nebraska, Michigan, Michigan State, and Wisconsin are all in the mix for the #2 spot. If Nebraska winds up at #2, it was a good move. If they wind up at #5, maybe not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

5. A&M. Again, like NU, a step sideways, but the culture fits and they do escape UT shadow a bit. Division fits for them as well.

The SEC is not a step sideways. This is an opportunity for aTm to gain a competitive advantage (the lure of the SEC) to get out from under the Longhorns' shadow. So far, it's been a HUGE win.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

6. Colorado. Outlier state, but the PAC financial deals and location of most of its alumni make this a decent move for them.

More money is great if it helps your teams. So far, they are a disaster of epic proportions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

67. Missouri. I'm not hatin' here, but outside of the financials, there isn't much upside in this move. With "stability" no longer the real issue, MU is an outlier state, in the wrong division, with the wrong culture, with dwindling recruiting advantages. The least advantages of any school

Stability might not be an issue now, but it absolutely was when Mizzou made the move. It took aTm and Mizzou leaving to get the attention of the conference overlords and force them to address the issue. The team isn't very good this year, but that has nothing to do with the SEC versus the Big 12. They would be fighting to be bowl eligible in either conference. Big win for Mizzou.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

That said, looking from the conference perspective:

1. B12. Conference facing extinction and needed two more teams to keep its contract intended for 12. No CCG could be seen as a negative, but internally, that view not necessarily shared. Getting pay on par with the other more established conferences.

Credit to the Big 12 for managing to remain not only viable but arguably the fourth most stable conference and the second or third best athletically. They aren't as strong with WVU and TCU as they were with Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri, and aTm, but they made the best of a bad situation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

2. PAC. Got the big financial deal they wanted, the networks they wanted, and the CCG they wanted. Failed to make the bigger 16 team play and is still somewhat isolated by time zone bias.

Adding Utah and Colorado has been a disaster in terms of overall athletic and academic strength. Financially, they are better off, but they are the biggest loser in all of this because they missed out on landing the whale (Texas and the other Big 12 schools they were courting).

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

3. SEC. The best teams might be there, but as a conference, expansion hasn't yet paid the dividens. This could change if they get the network they want and possibly expand some more. 14 teams creates schedules that means certain teams won't see each other for years at a time. Getting acess to Texas is a plus and Missouri could add if/once the network gets going. But, the buzz about SEC expansion wasn't nearly as impactful as it was in B12 or PAC.

The SEC's moves will ultimately be judged by their next TV deal. If it's as big as it has been rumored to be, it will be a huge win. The SEC wasn't going to get a lot of buzz, as the entire conference was already in full roar. That said, they really upgraded their academics by adding two AAU schools.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

4. B1G. Nebraska is a football "name", but losing their AAU status was bit of the "egg on face". Since the B1G pie was already set, revenues did not really increase, though this could change once renegotiation and possible expansion comes around.

Saul Too, most of our disagreements seem to be whether a move from one of the big boy conferences to another constitutes "a step up".

In other words, from my perspective, there's no more on an advantage to be gained via the system as long as one is in one of the four conferences. The actual differences between them are minimal beyond "percetion". One can argue, correctly, the SEC is the best football conference of the four, but what advantages does the system give that?

The only other area of disagreement is in the ACC. The ACC is an example of a conference whose parts are more valuable than its whole. It is the bottom of the ACC (and that is a large grouping) that prevents either FSU or Clemson from gaining in their relative positions. When a good SEC team loses, it isn't going to fall much from the strength of its conference. When an ACC team falls, it has little hope of getting back into the conversation. FSU stands the best chance because they play a top SEC team to end the season.

__________________
You'll see it's all a show, keep 'em laughing as you go, just remember, the last laugh is on you, and always look on the bright side of life!

Nebraska moved into an easier conference to win IMO and have an advantage with recruiting. I don't see that with Mizzou while your state has plenty of talent you'll never out recruit the Florida's and Alabama's. I think you guys jumped the gun a bit.

Nebraska moved into an easier conference to win IMO and have an advantage with recruiting. I don't see that with Mizzou while your state has plenty of talent you'll never out recruit the Florida's and Alabama's. I think you guys jumped the gun a bit.

I'm not saying the media will be the final determinant whether Missouri mad a good decision or not, but, when you eliminate pro-Mizzou media, I don't see a lot of SEC based or nationally-based articles gushing about the good move they made. I have seen articles to the opposite. Not overwhelmingly so, but to say the overall reaction towards Mizzou in the SEC has been kind of , would be kind.

Now, maybe that changes if the Tigers have a very good showing on the basketball side of the equation, at least from the national perspective (because we know the majority of the SEC cares very little for the basketball season). If Missouri makes a strong push at the top, I think the move will look better for them nationally, especially if they can beat UK.

__________________
You'll see it's all a show, keep 'em laughing as you go, just remember, the last laugh is on you, and always look on the bright side of life!

Saul Too, most of our disagreements seem to be whether a move from one of the big boy conferences to another constitutes "a step up".

In other words, from my perspective, there's no more on an advantage to be gained via the system as long as one is in one of the four conferences. The actual differences between them are minimal beyond "percetion". One can argue, correctly, the SEC is the best football conference of the four, but what advantages does the system give that?

The only other area of disagreement is in the ACC. The ACC is an example of a conference whose parts are more valuable than its whole. It is the bottom of the ACC (and that is a large grouping) that prevents either FSU or Clemson from gaining in their relative positions. When a good SEC team loses, it isn't going to fall much from the strength of its conference. When an ACC team falls, it has little hope of getting back into the conversation. FSU stands the best chance because they play a top SEC team to end the season.

You're right about not having a systemic advantage by moving from one power conference to a better power conference, but there are recruiting opportunities in the SEC that wouldn't otherwise be available. Whether or not aTm and Mizzou take advantage of them remains to be seen.

Kids want to play in the SEC. It's the big time. People talk about Mizzou getting Texas players because they want to play against schools from Texas, but they act like the same won't be true of Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, and, yes, Texas now that we're in the SEC.

I don't think we really even disagree much on the ACC. They aren't great. They just don't deserve to be lumped in with the BEAST. Not yet, anyway.

Now, maybe that changes if the Tigers have a very good showing on the basketball side of the equation, at least from the national perspective (because we know the majority of the SEC cares very little for the basketball season).

The area doesn't care for basketball much, but Missouri does. You've got a TON of talent coming out of the SEC footprint, and only a couple of strong basketball schools. Mizzou is positioned to capitalize on this. It's not like the SEC hasn't been raking in basketball hardware.

The area doesn't care for basketball much, but Missouri does. You've got a TON of talent coming out of the SEC footprint, and only a couple of strong basketball schools. Mizzou is positioned to capitalize on this. It's not like the SEC hasn't been raking in basketball hardware.

I agree, if Missouri is to make their mark in the conference, this is the line they will do it in. If they can make the SEC a three team discussion between UK, UF and MU, it will be a big win for them on the national perspective. Football may drive realignment, but for half the academic year, the national focus is on basketball.

__________________
You'll see it's all a show, keep 'em laughing as you go, just remember, the last laugh is on you, and always look on the bright side of life!